AUKUS

[Gnadenburg]

"AUKUS with its 8 SSN buy has bi-partisan support going right back to Sept."


They're politicians - they'll use whatever stick they can find to beat the other side - wait & see..................

I appreciate your dogma, however, China is playing its hand. The "Yellow Peril" is real, even for the moderate Left.

Personally, I don't like irrational fear mongering, fuelling partisan political campaigns in Australia. Such as the Defence Minister's recent press conference stating Chinese missiles can strike as far as Hobart. This is irrelevant. Australia's maritime interests are not. Our fuel supplies are just as vulnerable as the CCP's to a interdiction campaign through Indonesian choke points. SSN's offer relevance here. As would securing better national fuel reserves.

[Asturias56]

I agree - SSN's make a lot of sense for Australia - but there is bill and it won't be small. And over the many years before the programme is bedded in and the boats are on patrol there will be several elections

I have little faith in the ability of any politicians of any country to put long-term over being elected

[RickNRoll]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/14/australias-aukus-nuclear-submarines-estimated-to-cost-at-least-70bn?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Eight subs to cost a total of 178 billion.

[tartare]

Doesn't surprise me - particularly when you read about the sums the UK had to spend.
Not clear how that costing is arrived at and over what time - if we're talking $178bn incl. inflation up to the point that capability is introduced - then the sum is not that large.

[rattman]

Doesn't surprise me - particularly when you read about the sums the UK had to spend.
Not clear how that costing is arrived at and over what time - if we're talking $178bn incl. inflation up to the point that capability is introduced - then the sum is not that large.

Australia prices its defence as total lifetime cost including expected inflation. so the cost of the subs, the spares the maintainence plus additional crews, re/training of crews, accomodation of crews upgrade of naval facilites. So it will be 178 billion over a 50 year time period

Just look at the K9/huntsman program that was just signed 30 k9's at 3 million each and 15 ammo haulers at about 1.5 million each, doesn't cover the 900 million program cost

[tartare]

So - around A$3.56bn per annum for an absolutely game changing capability.
Sounds fair enough.

[NumptyAussie]

So - around A$3.56bn per annum for an absolutely game changing capability.
Sounds fair enough.

Possibly too late though?

ICBM or ICCM (non nuke warhead) stationed in the NT may provide a short term (10 year) deterrent?

[Bengo]

Possibly too late though?

ICBM or ICCM (non nuke warhead) stationed in the NT may provide a short term (10 year) deterrent?

The trouble with ICBM is that there is no way to tell whether you are on the inbound end of a conventional version, or a nuclear armed version. Whichever you launch, the recipient is likely to treat it as the nuclear version and respond accordingly.

ICCM are less difficult, as I think there currently no western nuclear armed versions, but a lot easier to stop, a lot less effective against hardened targets and not much of a deterrent.

N

[tartare]

Have long believed Australia needs a full nuclear deterrent.
Wish it wasn't the case - but the medium to long term outlook in this part of the world is potentially quite dark.
If I were making the decisions, I'd be ensuring that the new boats are fully capable of firing weapons with special payloads.
Numpty makes an interesting point though.
Nothing to stop` straya from basing some of them new hypersonic glide vehicle things up in the GAFA...

[Asturias56]

The problem with Australia having a full nuclear deterrent is that it would only take 5 - 10 warheads coming the other way to fry most of the population.

[NumptyAussie]

The problem with Australia having a full nuclear deterrent is that it would only take 5 - 10 warheads coming the other way to fry most of the population.

Aye, it's a MAD world...

[Navaleye]

Its worth remembering that prior to 1960, the UK had zero experience of building SSNs or the equipment to do so. It spat them out quite regularly thereafter and that was with very immature technology. Using today's technology and skills, I have no reason to believe the Aussies can't

[TBM-Legend]

Aye, it's a MAD world...

MAD has worked for nigh on 60+ years long may it continue...

[henra]

MAD has worked for nigh on 60+ years long may it continue...
For the other half of 'M' out of MAD you would need more than just a handful of instant sunshine buckets. For MAD Australia is geografically not terribly favoured. Unless living in the desert appears as an attractive option...

[Dan Gerous]

For the other half of 'M' out of MAD you would need more than just a handful of instant sunshine buckets. For MAD Australia is geografically not terribly favoured. Unless living in the desert appears as an attractive option...

It would make for some great MAD MAX films.:)

[Herod]

MAD only works when all the nuclear powers are pragmatic enough to realise the consequences. Worryingly, I suspect there are a few now who don't (or don't really care).

[tartare]

Sure, it seems apocalyptic and you'd get every fool from Helen Caldicott (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Caldicott) down on the streets in protest.
Hugh White (https://researchprofiles.anu.edu.au/en/persons/hugh-white) has the view the discussion should be had - and he's a pretty sensible and well informed bloke.
From what I read - the USN is considering reintroducing a nuclear equipped cruise missile.
So, let's say we get the Virginia class.
The Block V will have a loadout of at least 28 TLAMs.
Assume that there is a TLAM-N or it's successor reintroduced.
Based on that - the numbers aren't as tilted in China's favour as might first appear.
Sure, they could effectively obliterate Australia with one missile... but that's not the point.
Being conservative and assuming earlier generation TLAM success rates of 85 per cent - that's a potential of 23 Australian nuclear warheads hitting Chinese targets in a second strike from one boat.
A nuclear equipped Australia using just one of it's boats could hold at threat a significant proportion of the Chinese population.
Pause for thought for Chinese decision makers - and that's the stabilising point of MAD.

[Bengo]

But whence cometh 23 or more Australian warheads? They will need to be thermonuclear ones to achieve the objective of holding the Chinese population at threat, and they have to fit TLAM Follow on.
The non proliferation treaty means they are not coming ready made, and even if you are slipped a design under the table, they are not easy to turn into reality. Turning yellow ore into HEU and or Pu ain't easy or cheap either.
Then you have to have won the political donnybrook, before you can even make a serious start.

Good Luck

N

[rattman]

But whence cometh 23 or more Australian warheads? They will need to be thermonuclear ones to achieve the objective of holding the Chinese population at threat, and they have to fit TLAM Follow on.
The non proliferation treaty means they are not coming ready made, and even if you are slipped a design under the table, they are not easy to turn into reality. Turning yellow ore into HEU and or Pu ain't easy or cheap either.
Then you have to have won the political donnybrook, before you can even make a serious start.

Good Luck

N

Making the HEU is probably easier than we think. ANSTO (https://www.ansto.gov.au/) developed SILEX, its considered to be the most efficient means of creating HEU. How much more efficient than conventional centrafuges or what ever means most people use, I got no idea.

But silex is exclusively licensed to the US government. But nuclear weapons for australia is a pipe dream and wont ever happen

[tartare]

But nuclear weapons for australia is a pipe dream and wont ever happen

Indeed.
I agree with the earlier poster - that if a war wrecked and (at that time) artisanal economy like Britain can progress to a full CASD in ~20 years, then I reckon Australia now and in future is certainly technically capable of doing.
Even the nuclear powered boats alone are well within Australia's manufacturing and sustainment capabilities.
Australia prior up until the 60s had a vibrant manufacturing base - I seem to remember hearing that at that point up to 30 per cent of GDP was manufacturing related.
The rot set in after that.
The thing that's freaking ill informed commentators is that this project is a multi-decadal one of nation-building scale - but that doesn't mean it's not doable.
As to weapons - you're dead right.
The general public here are appallingly naive about nuclear power alone - and despite the ANZAC tradition, Australian culture is a lot less martial than that of Britain or the US.
The thought of Australian nuclear weapons would prompt hand wringing on an epic scale!
That said, I think the John Bradfields of Australia's past would be appalled by the spineless, short-termism and lack of vision of today's decision makers.
The though of the CCP invading Australia or directly attacking the mainland is likely a fever dream - but the possibility of them annexing neighbouring territories is not.
I can see a future where China might attack regional neighbours in continuous low-level conflicts and skirmishes, much like Russia is doing now, and raise a finger to anyone who objects.
A time when the RAN might not be able to sail through international waters to the north because there was a real risk of actually being sunk, or our P-8s being shot down.
Chinese intelligence agencies killing local dissidents here in Australia with impunity - not outside the realms of possibility.
And everyone here too scared to say anything for fear of provoking the CCP.
All because we didn't have the wick to properly stand up to them when we could.
Do we really want a near neighbour like that?

[Navaleye]

The Israelis have them on their boats. Can't be too difficult

[Asturias56]

As Tartare said - "that if a war wrecked and (at that time) artisanal economy like Britain can progress to a full CASD in ~20 years, then I reckon Australia now and in future is certainly technically capable of doing."

You might also look at N Korea - a genuine economic basket case, Israel - not a vast industrial complex, Pakistan & India - probably roughly equivalent to the UK around 1950 at the time they started building a bomb. The technologies are well known - the question is do you have the political will and sticking power to divert a very large amount of national wealth and expertise for a decade into building a bomb?

Looking at the current users you'd say you'd have to face a clear and overwhelming threat to the very existence of the the nation. I don't think the Australian public sees China in those terms as yet

[NumptyAussie]

Luckily Australia has a few friends on speed dial that may have a few spare, that they could borrow....

[rattman]

Kinda missed this, but apparently SK is looking at nuclear subs and some discussion that they might be bought into the submarine part of the aukus deal. There are various sources talking about, hard to tell if they just reprinting the same dodgy source or genuine multiple sources. If SK gets one going to assume japan might be try and jump aboard as well. H I Sutton wrote an article for naval news or you can just google to see a list of sources and look at your preffered one

[golder]

India and France are talking nuke subs too.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/french-defence-minister-to-visit-india-this-week-maritime-cooperation-nuke-technology-for-submarine-on-agenda/articleshow/88267243.cms

[tartare]

In another life, was at a press conference in Wellington with the Indian ambassador in `98 just after their test had been announced.
"There's huge poverty in your country - how can you justify spending all that money on nuclear weapons?" asked me as a smart arse young journo.
He smiled wryly and said "Actually, developing weapons isn't that expensive at all."
Food for thought - no pun intended.
I agree - it's all down to political will.
I wonder if somewhere in Canberra, on some highly classified, air-gapped system, there are updated scenarios modelling how we'd rapidly get our hands on them from the cousins, or what a breakout time for a domestic capability might be.
Certainly would have been the case in Gorton's time.

[golder]

In another life, was at a press conference in Wellington with the Indian ambassador in `98 just after their test had been announced.
"There's huge poverty in your country - how can you justify spending all that money on nuclear weapons?" asked me as a smart arse young journo.
He smiled wryly and said "Actually, developing weapons isn't that expensive at all."
Food for thought - no pun intended.
I agree - it's all down to political will.
I wonder if somewhere in Canberra, on some highly classified, air-gapped system, there are updated scenarios modelling how we'd rapidly get our hands on them from the cousins, or what a breakout time for a domestic capability might be.
Certainly would have been the case in Gorton's time.
Nuke weapons aren't an option. We have signed a nonproliferation treaty. They are off the table.

[Alt Flieger]

The nuclear option is a ship that sailed a long time ago. Billy McMahon canned it back in the ‘70s.
Probably the worst PM in Australian history.
Nuclear power should have been an established industry long ago.
But Australians are naive and content to rely on the USof A to guarantee their security.
Stupid but politically the only option.
Australians don’t want to face up to their strategic reality.
Or spend the money or effort required to be independent.
Curtin started it and not much has changed since.

[megan]

Probably the worst PM in Australian historyEvery black cloud has a silver lining, he pulled us out of Vietnam.

[Alt Flieger]

Every black cloud has a silver lining, he pulled us out of Vietnam.

You are being far too generous. He just continued Gortons policy and the job was finished by Whitlam.
He was a no idea light weight who nobody liked or trusted.
If we had a nuclear industry carbon emissions would have been sorted by now.
A Huge missed opportunity that we are paying for now.

[TBM-Legend]

From today's Australian newspaper.


Nuclear subs to arrive ‘at earliest possible date’White House moves to quell concerns over delivery of subs as US, UK and Australia move to expand scope of AUKUS alliance."

[Going Boeing]

From today's Australian newspaper.Nuclear subs to arrive ‘at earliest possible date

That report would be based on this White House release.Readout of AUKUS Joint Steering Group MeetingsDECEMBER 17, 2021

Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States of America recently held the inaugural meetings of the AUKUS Trilateral Joint Steering Groups, which were established as part of the governance structure of AUKUS in September 2021. The Joint Steering Group for Advanced Capabilities met on December 9 and the Joint Steering Group for Australia’s Nuclear-Powered Submarine Program met on December 14. Both meetings were held at the Pentagon.

The delegations reaffirmed the Leaders’ vision that was laid out in September 2021 and discussed the intensive work underway across the governments and the significant progress made in the three months since the announcement of AUKUS.

The meetings were productive and the participants outlined next steps to continue the positive trajectory in implementation.

During the Joint Steering Group meeting on Advanced Capabilities, participants identified opportunities for collaboration on a range of critical capabilities and technologies. They committed to significantly deepen cooperation and enhance interoperability, and in so doing strengthen security and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond. In particular, participants committed to finalizing a program of work in relation to advanced capabilities by early 2022. Beyond the four initial areas of focus outlined in the Joint Leaders’ Statement on AUKUS—cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, and additional undersea capabilities—participants also discussed other additional capabilities and agreed to identify potential opportunities for collaboration in those areas.

During the Joint Steering Group meeting on Australia’s Nuclear-Powered Submarine Program, the participants reaffirmed the trilateral commitment to bring the Australian capability into service at the earliest possible date. The delegations agreed on the next steps over the 18-month consultation period to define the optimal pathway for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, and for the Working Groups to examine in detail the critical actions necessary to establish an enduring program in Australia. The participants reviewed achievements since September, including the signing of the Exchange of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information Agreement and the path forward to bring that into force, which will enable full and effective consultation between the governments over the 18-month period.

The participants also discussed how they will work to ensure that the submarine program upholds their longstanding leadership in global non-proliferation, including through continued close consultation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The participants underscored that the three countries remain steadfast in support of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and its cornerstone, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. They reaffirmed that the three governments will comply with their respective non-proliferation obligations and commitments and that they intend to implement the strongest possible non-proliferation standards.

Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States look forward to continuing to build on this momentum as they work together to deliver advanced defense and technology capabilities, including an Australian nuclear-powered submarine capability.

[Asturias56]

well 18 months consultation from Sept 2021 suggests deployment is a long way off - Going Boeing in her/his post of 27th November suggests 2038 for first vessel in service

[unmanned_droid]

They'll get 2nd hand US before then, imo - 2038 is too late if Xi is going to follow through with 'reunification' at around 100yr anniversary of the CCP, which, was this year, granted. I don't see them getting another 17+yrs before an attempt is made.

[Asturias56]

I presume you mean reunifying the Peoples Republic with Taiwan not Australia?

And that seems to suggest that Australia will go to war with China over Taiwan?

I know a lot of Australians and I don't know a single one who would back that. Hell, I don't think even the Americans will go to war over Taiwan TBH when push comes to shove

[Going Boeing]

This announcement is probably timed because of the upcoming election but it does indicate that the behind the scenes work is progressing and all parties are committed to expediting the selection and build process.

Dutton announcement on Sky News (https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/defence-and-foreign-affairs/australias-nuclear-submarines-ahead-of-schedule/video/0259c2d19592faf5fa09b4199821748f)

[megan]

He just continued Gortons policy and the job was finished by WhitlamWhitlam had nothing to do with the draw down, the only people left in country when he came to power were a few people tying up loose ends, a few members of the training team and the embassy guard. All Whitlam did was cancel conscription, which was no longer needed with our getting out. The draw down started before it was publicly announced, my unit was ordered to cease combat operations at 0530 local 9th June 1971, note the date on the Cabinet paper.


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/980x1348/aaaa_1999d778f23cb3e3c4accaa03ba52959a656ee68.png
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/980x1401/aaaa1_429261618bb561db1945b6e734ca2ff14f606375.png

[Alt Flieger]

Ok. I get all that . Not a fan of Whitlam either. The point I was trying to make is that McMahon was a useless waste of space.

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/30/south-korea-presidential-contender-vows-to-seek-nuclear-powered-submarines-months-after-australias-aukus-deal

South Korea presidential contender vows to seek nuclear-powered submarines, months after Australia’s Aukus deal

Sout Korea’s ruling party presidential candidate said he will seek US support to build nuclear-powered submarines to better counter threats from North Korea and proactively seek to reopen stalled denuclearisation talks between Pyongyang and Washington.

In an interview with Reuters and two other media outlets, Lee Jae-myung also pledged to put aside “strategic ambiguity” in the face of intensifying Sino-US rivalry, vowing pragmatic diplomacy would avoid South Korea being forced to choose between the two countries.……

[golder]

In an interview with Reuters and two other media outlets, Lee Jae-myung also pledged to put aside “strategic ambiguity” in the face of intensifying Sino-US rivalry, vowing pragmatic diplomacy would avoid South Korea being forced to choose between the two countries.……
I think that was meant for the upcoming local elections.
If he wins. Starting off negations, with the blackmail threat against the US. Always leads to a positive outcome. It's not going to happen. They will have to ask the French if they want to sell their guarded tech for a price. I can't see the French doing that either. Brazil is providing their own nuke engine.

[ORAC]

I think they’d prefer French technology anyway.

HEU rectors have a longer life but have NPT issues, as discussed. South Korea, on the other hand, already has a domestic nuclear industry with 24 working reactors procuring a third of the countries electricity. Supporting the refuelling of their own boats every 5-10 years wouldn’t be a major step once they have the designs.

[golder]

I think they’d prefer French technology anyway.

HEU rectors have a longer life but have NPT issues, as discussed. South Korea, on the other hand, already has a domestic nuclear industry with 24 working reactors procuring a third of the countries electricity. Supporting the refuelling of their own boats every 5-10 years wouldn’t be a major step once they have the designs.
All they need to do now is convince France. They haven't offered their nuke tech to anyone yet.

[ORAC]

All they need to do now is convince France. They haven't offered their nuke tech to anyone yet.
From the earlier comments on this thread they offered it to Oz - who declined in favour of the longer life HEU option so they wouldn’t have the refuelling issues during boat service life.

And France seems to be offering the technology, or at least provide the rectors, to India - perhaps in response.

Which might be another reason for South Korea to want to have their own….

https://www.businessworld.in/article/France-Set-To-Offer-Barracuda-Nuclear-Submarines-To-India/15-12-2021-414965

[golder]

It wasn't offered to Australia and we never seriously considered it, because of refueling. After we canceled, IMO because we were seen more of a meal ticket. Their were questions asked by France, but the French still didn't offer their tech. We'll see about India, who is leasing the Russian nuke. IMO India is a bit too close to Russia, to share such tech.

[ORAC]

Then of course there is the sale of the technology to Brazil for their SNBR…

https://www.naval-group.com/en/prosub-france-brazil-unwavering-proximity

[golder]

I posted Brazil a few posts before, you may have missed it. AFAIK they are developing their own nuke engine. Your own link says "support from Naval Group in the design and construction of a new class of nuclear-powered" It may extend to helping them develop their own. It isn't the French engine that is being transferred. It is a long, ongoing build.

[rattman]

Then of course there is the sale of the technology to Brazil for their SNBR…

https://www.naval-group.com/en/prosub-france-brazil-unwavering-proximity

So a few things not going to quote them seperately. HEU is not covered by the NPT in any way or shape form. Its completely omitted from it, its not a grey it completely doesn't exist or mentioned. When the NPT was signed the only country to use HEU reactors was the USSR. Other countries like france played with the concept and I think US had on HEU sub for evaluation purposes


Secondly australia never requested nor did france ever offer nuclear submarines (publically). No PM up till morrisson was willing to take the risk of the backlash of going nuclear, there was rumors that the reason france was picked was because the plan was to make the first 6 attack conventional and the later 6 nuclear.

France to my knowledge has never offered nuclear propulsion to any other country, france cant give/sell the tech to india because india not a signitory to the NPT, brazil is developing their own reactors, france is just helping with the contruction of the hulls

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/01/03/us-navy-avoided-a-2022-trough-in-submarine-fleet-size-but-industry-challenges-threaten-future-growth/

US Navy avoided a 2022 ‘trough’ in submarine fleet size, but industry challenges threaten future growth

[Asturias56]

In the past we've always thought defence unit numbers would fall due to the ever-increasing costs (Augustine's Law) but I never thought we'd finish up designing something so complicated that it would be impossible to build at any speed - that article suggest 6 years for new Virginias - and we're already someway along the learning curve..............

[Not_a_boffin]

In the past we've always thought defence unit numbers would fall due to the ever-increasing costs (Augustine's Law) but I never thought we'd finish up designing something so complicated that it would be impossible to build at any speed - that article suggest 6 years for new Virginias - and we're already someway along the learning curve..............

What the article actually suggests is that its not necessarily the complexity that's the issue - it's the availability of skilled labour. That's in the design and fabrication elements as well as parts of the supply chain. Take steel - submarine steel is actually fairly specialised in its strength properties as well as toughness and ductility - driven by particular military requirements. You don't just rock up at the steel mill and pick up a couple of thousand tonnes of HY100 each week. That's before you get to the qualification and inspection procedures, or indeed the welding procedures. You've also got specialist casting and forging techniques to deal with. Because the throughput volume has been so low, it means that the industrial base (and NAVSEA) have not been able to support sufficient people to quickly ramp up scale - and it's not something you can just go on a course for, particularly when some of that knowledge was generated thirty years ago and may not have been curated as (with hindsight) it should have been. Throw in some new safety requirements/procedures, changes in what industry uses to produce things (continuously cast steel compared to batch casting) and it gets even more complex. Now add in complex fluid and electronic systems - all designed built and qualified to military requirements - and it's an even bigger challenge.

It all comes down to people - or availability thereof.

[golder]

The manufacture said they will invest to do 3 a year. If there is a firm ongoing order.
https://news.usni.org/2020/11/18/navy-confident-it-could-build-3-virginia-ssns-a-year-though-more-study-needed-on-shipyard-capacity

[rattman]

Not aukus specificially but Australia and Japan have signed a Reciprocal Access Agreement. First one Japan has signed

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-06/australia-japan-to-sign-security-cooperation-treaty/100741012

[Going Boeing]

This diagram clearly shows the “time on station” advantages of the SSN over the SSK in the areas that RAN submarines are likely to operate. It’s very significant and shows why 8 SSN’s will be more effective than the previous plan for 12 SSK’s.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/768x912/8943f832_a9d5_471e_babe_cedaf0653d1c_f72bd66389c456821214147 7ffeb4f957f86ecee.jpeg

[ExtraShot]

This diagram clearly shows the “time on station” advantages of the SSN over the SSK in the areas that RAN submarines are likely to operate. It’s very significant and shows why 8 SSN’s will be more effective than the previous plan for 12 SSK’s.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/768x912/8943f832_a9d5_471e_babe_cedaf0653d1c_f72bd66389c456821214147 7ffeb4f957f86ecee.jpeg


Yes. That graphic certainly explains some of the capability increase.

Can anyone explain why the proposed number to be purchased is at least 8 and not at least 9? I thought there was a long-standing ‘rule of three’ with naval hardware (one available/on station for every three due transit/maintenance/etc).

Surely pushing for at least 9 is a small extra price to pay for an even greater amount of available hulls at any one time? Or does 8 provide for something I don’t know about?

[Going Boeing]

Can anyone explain why the proposed number to be purchased is at least 8 and not at least 9? I thought there was a long-standing ‘rule of three’ with naval hardware (one available/on station for every three due transit/maintenance/etc).

Surely pushing for at least 9 is a small extra price to pay for an even greater amount of available hulls at any one time? Or does 8 provide for something I don’t know about?

Yes, that’s a valid point. The Collins class always has 2 in heavy maintenance which leaves 2 (sometimes 3) available for deployment with the last one working up to operational status following maintenance.

There have been a number of statements where they talk about a “minimum of 8” SSN’s to be built in Australia, so they are leaving the option open for additional submarines if the political situation warrants it.

[golder]

I think the Virginia rotations are 6 months deployed, 2 year maintenance. There is also a gap after deployment, where they are looking to use them in the north sea. To run out the time.

[ChrisJ800]

Do we not have a closer port than at Perth for accessing those chokepoints or are they all now chinese controlled?

[rattman]

Do we not have a closer port than at Perth for accessing those chokepoints or are they all now chinese controlled?

Theres darwin, but due its location and surrounding arafura sea, its always been a non starter for any important combatants. Thats why permanent basing has only been small ships patrol boats and hydro graphic survey. Theres no other ports between darwin and perth. Sorta the same for east coast as well, the ports there are geographically unsuitable being the barrier reef. Same thing no major combatants based out northern QLD porst. Patrol and hydographic out of cairns. Army amphibious and a visit a couple of times a year by adelaide/canberra and choules to townsville.

[Going Boeing]

Do we not have a closer port than at Perth for accessing those chokepoints or are they all now chinese controlled?

The waters around the Port of Darwin (Arafura Sea) are shallow and are not suitable for submarine operations. Also, the Northern coastline of Australia experience very large tidal changes which involve different docking requirements. Cyclones also present another issue.

If the US was to begin submarine operations out of Australia, the joint operations would create a case for a resupply/rearming facility to be built at Exmouth (near Learmonth RAAF Base) as this would reduce transit times and get these vessels back on station faster. There is deep water just to the West so it’s more suitable than Darwin. Also, the relative isolation of that area would mean the activities at that facility would not be subject to many prying eyes.

____________________________________________________________
This is a more comprehensive map showing RAN submarine operating areas than the one I previously posted.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1939x1291/2a3de733_4cb3_4961_9ac3_a42633e7ff75_14deb66a8e9c295edc1a82a 777ae12a2496b225a.jpeg

[Asturias56]

"The waters around the Port of Darwin (Arafura Sea) are shallow and are not suitable for submarine operations. Also, the Northern coastline of Australia experience very large tidal changes which involve different docking requirements. Cyclones also present another issue."

You're also a very long way from significant technical resources and staff

[etudiant]

"The waters around the Port of Darwin (Arafura Sea) are shallow and are not suitable for submarine operations. Also, the Northern coastline of Australia experience very large tidal changes which involve different docking requirements. Cyclones also present another issue."

You're also a very long way from significant technical resources and staff

Is Perth any better in those respects?
Have to say, from a national policy perspective, it sure would make sense to have Perth as a West coast counterpart to all the current East coast infrastructure..

[Gnadenburg]

Exmouth was used by the US Navy as a submarine base in WW2 as their Fleet submarines escaped from Manila Bay. It was considered too remote with a lack of infrastructure and had been bombed by the Japanese. Fremantle then became their base for conducting operations through the Indonesian archipelagic choke points and further afield. Incidentally, the USN used submarine tenders in Exmouth initially- are the relevant to the future of the RAN?

Battles of the last Pacific War seem ever so relevant today as the CCP’s influence creeps south. The last of GB’s theatre maps lacks East Coast weight? Considering the Coral Sea and vital lines of communication to the West Coast of the USA.

[Maggie Island]

Is Perth any better in those respects?
Have to say, from a national policy perspective, it sure would make sense to have Perth as a West coast counterpart to all the current East coast infrastructure..

There’s a sizeable trench out the back of Rottnest island that the subs use for training amongst other things

[ORAC]

Incidentally, the USN used submarine tenders in Exmouth initially- are the relevant to the future of the RAN?
. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Loch#US_Navy_at_Holy_Loch

[Going Boeing]

The USN has two 1970’s era submarine tenders forward based in Guam and which are due to be replaced in the mid-late 2020’s. It would be interesting to see if it was feasible to static base them near Learmonth/Exmouth in a cyclone protective harbour. It would be a quick way of providing this capability until more permanent facilities can be constructed.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/08/u-s-navys-response-to-new-submarine-tender-replacements/

[Asturias56]

"Is Perth any better in those respects?"

Its the sort of backup available on things like electronics companies, machine shops and the availability of skilled people - you're far better off for resources in a city of over 2 million than in one of less than 150,000. Tenders would work I guess but that's another layer of people and expense

[ChrisJ800]

The US can have subs or used to in shallow harbors like Pearl Harbor or Subic bay. So why cant we?

[rattman]

The US can have subs or used to in shallow harbors like Pearl Harbor or Subic bay. So why cant we?

Its not the harbor its the water around look at hawaii on depth chart, its a mountain with DEEP water around it. Also cant find any reference to US nuclear subs based out of subic, yes they visit, but basing is a different kettle of fish

[Going Boeing]

The US can have subs or used to in shallow harbors like Pearl Harbor or Subic bay. So why cant we?

As Rattman said, it’s the depth of water around the harbour that is important.

In deep water, the submarine can change depth to sit just above or below temperature inversions to reduce the chances of detection from noise produced by the boat. In shallow water, the submarine captain has fewer evasion choices so enemy ASW assets (including submarines) can focus on the waters around the harbour to pick off submarines entering or leaving.

[RickNRoll]

Trump defence spokesperson questions AUKUS. Claims people in the military and conservative politicians don't want to share the technology.

https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/concerns-over-aukus-submarine-deal/video/c5e8bf7077b9689864017b9fe9da228b

[ORAC]

Forecast - and probably why the UK were included in the plans….

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/642689-aukus-26.html#post11124759

[Dryce]

As Rattman said, it’s the depth of water around the harbour that is important.

In deep water, the submarine can change depth to sit just above or below temperature inversions to reduce the chances of detection from noise produced by the boat. In shallow water, the submarine captain has fewer evasion choices so enemy ASW assets (including submarines) can focus on the waters around the harbour to pick off submarines entering or leaving.

You don't usually park your expensive SSN close to harbour worrying about layers and temperature.

The advantage of being close to deeper water is speed of deployment.

A SSN can trundle about the depths at sustained speed. But there are are operational consrtaints. It needs a specific range of depth to do that speedy trundling safely in peacetime with a decent amount of water above and decent amount below.

So if you sit your SSN harbour facility somewhere where there are 100s of km of shallow waters to transit then getting the boats in and out means a slower transit time - if you lose a couple of days or more getting out and the same again getting back then that reduces time on station and adds to your lifetime costs.(Losing 4 days on 90 day patrol is 5% over the lifetime). If you end up doing much of that transit on the surface then you're visible and vulnerable.

[rattman]

and there might only be a limited amount of routes out

Its why australia doesn't base any real surface combatants inside the barrier reef. Theres only limited routes through the reef and its easy to block these with mines or other forces

[Flap Track 6]

My employer is a supplier to the Astute program and has been picking up talk of additional equipment orders. Spares? Overhaul float stock? Additional boats?

[Going Boeing]

My employer is a supplier to the Astute program and has been picking up talk of additional equipment orders. Spares? Overhaul float stock? Additional boats?

Thanks for that, FT6. The Astute class is attractive for the RAN because of the lower cost and smaller crew but there are significant concerns about the PWR2 reactor being 8 years shorter life (than the Virginia’s S9G) and the reactor cooling system requiring electrical pumps to always be running whereas the S9G can produce reasonable power levels with convection cooling - very important in event of a total power failure.

I think that the RN needs additional Astutes in these uncertain times as 7 boats is insufficient to have a presence where the UK has global interests. They may be gearing up to build more of them along side of the Dreadnought assembly. Alternatively, additional spares is definitely a possibility to support the current Astutes if their utilisation has to be significantly increased.

[rattman]

I think that the RN needs additional Astutes in these uncertain times as 7 boats is insufficient to have a presence where the UK has global interests. They may be gearing up to build more of them along side of the Dreadnought assembly. Additional spares is definitely a possibility to support the current Astutes if their utilisation has to be significantly increased.

Also take into account astute will only have about 10 years left of its programmed life left when agincourt commissions into fleet

[ORAC]

Going_Boeing,

As I understand the original PWR2 reactor is no longer in production and has rep been replaced with the PWR3 based around S9G with thirty percent fewer parts as planned for use in the Dreadnaught class - and the last of the currently planned Astute.

And, of course, the SSNR…

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/dsei-2021/2021/09/uk-begins-work-on-next-generation-nuclear-powered-attack-submarine/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_PWR#PWR3

[rattman]

Thats the way I understand it as well, they would either have to restart the production of PWR2's or shoe horn in a pwr3 into the astute hulls. Cant imagine anyone who knows enough about the sub/reactors would start talking about it on public forums. So we will be still be waiting another 12 months of so to see what thier plan is.

The astues in building all have pwr2's. The SSN(X) will be designed around PWR3

[Going Boeing]

That’s also my understanding.

I did read one article that said the PWR3 cannot be downsized to fit into the Astute’s hull - if that’s the case, then I can’t see any more Astutes being built.

Any additional RN SSN’s will have to be SSNR’s but by the time they start getting them into the water (after the Dreadnought SSBNs have been completed), the first of the Astutes will be retiring.

[ORAC]

Update on Virginia/Columbia production schedules.

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/01/24/electric-boat-readies-to-deliver-attack-sub-oregon-almost-two-years-after-last-delivery/

Electric Boat readies to deliver attack sub Oregon, almost two years after last delivery

[Going Boeing]

It’s claimed that the Collins class submarines are constructed of a lighter, yet stronger steel than the HY100 steel used in the Virginia class. It’s also easier to weld and has better blast properties. The following article was written when the French designed Attack class submarine was being developed for the RAN. It shows that considerable effort was being made to design the best steel possible for the generally warmer waters that the new submarines would be operating in.

https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/sea/deep-dive-into-underwater-material-advances

It will be interesting if this steel technology can be used on the SSN that is chosen for the RAN. It may introduce extra design costs which is not desirable when the intention is to build a mature “off the shelf design”.



Also, the Collins class has X configuration of the aft control surfaces which give improved manoeuvrability and less drag as they are smaller in size. This setup works very well in shallow water operations. It also has more effective control when turning the submarine whilst at high speed - it’s easier to compensate the tendency for the bow to drop. The surfaces are less affected by disturbed water from the sail, etc. Neither the Astute or Virginia class have this configuration but the new Columbia class SSBN will have X configured control surfaces.

[golder]

Regardless of the click bait articles and the real, initial issues. The Collins is still a world class sub. It does well in the joint exercises. Though ready for a major update.

[rattman]

Indonesia is apparently in final stages of buying some scorpenes from france

[Not_a_boffin]

It’s claimed that the Collins class submarines are constructed of a lighter, yet stronger steel than the HY100 steel used in the Virginia class.

Steel doesn't get appreciably lighter. What you end up doing is using higher strength steel which allows you to reduce thickness and hence weight of structure. However, that's only if the fracture toughness properties allow it to absorb the fatigue damage the boat will see, allow for welding imperfections/flaws and resist both crack growth and high strain-rate loading. Plus be able to be formed and welded with acceptable levels of pre-heating etc, etc.

Tricky stuff submarine steel.

[ORAC]

The future? Perhaps initially for submarine UAVs. Gets around MAD as well….

https://www.techradar.com/news/impossible-plastic-like-material-could-make-laptops-smartphones-even-thinner-and-sturdier

Scientists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have created a new material using a new polymerizing process. The material, called 2DPA-1, a type of polyaramide, is said to be as light as plastic and as strong as steel; even better, it can be manufactured at industrial scale which bodes well for its go-to-market timeframe.

The material, which is the first polymer to be polymerized in 2D, adopts a planar structure, as opposed to a string one; think spaghetti lines and lasagne sheets. The team, led by Michael Strano, the Carbon P. Dubbs Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT, managed to crack a problem that has left many generations of Ppolymer scientists befuddled.

2DPA-1 can sustain deformative forces up to six times greater than bulletproof glass and has a yield strength (the force required to break the material) 12 times that of steel at equal density. Another intriguing property is that it is impermeable to gases which could mean waterproof ultrathin coatings…..

[Asturias56]

"I think that the RN needs additional Astutes in these uncertain times as 7 boats is insufficient to have a presence where the UK has global interests. They may be gearing up to build more of them along side of the Dreadnought assembly."

Not possible I understand - Barrow can just about produce a submarine every 3 years or so. They don't have the manpower and certainly not the trained manpower to do any better - in fact they often do worse. The cost of a new line would be incredible. Construction of Astutes was timed to end as serious construction of the new SSBN's started. They have to be built first and in the meantime the Navy is looking at the design for the Astute successor

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/dsei-2021/2021/09/uk-begins-work-on-next-generation-nuclear-powered-attack-submarine/#:~:text=BAE%20Systems%20and%20Rolls%2DRoyce,will%20replace% 20the%20Astute%2Dclass.

Our American friends often post about the problems they have with two constructors in getting vessels out on time.

[Going Boeing]

The Brits are finally starting on the dismantling of their nuclear submarines that have been stored for many years at Devonport. The work will be done at the Peel Ports Inchgreen Dry Dock, west of Glasgow.

First nuclear submarine to be recycled (https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/hms-valiant-first-nuclear-sub-6624472?fbclid=IwAR1InVdEMk26r7dReZdaQ78TP05YQXX5skQtCPjJDXq 4q4sWruAvbyAdm0Q)


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1290/814f6abd_6f6a_4c34_8460_9317a47dc557_f6d6e571a57abcd94d2fd5b e4cd8a9acc96ef3f5.jpeg
UK Nuclear Submarine storage at Devonport
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1968x1283/75327deb_4cce_4139_a81e_7f9934e810bf_786959c55ec758a9462278b 544c8a7e24b5b738a.jpeg
Peel Ports Inchgreen Dry Dock

[Not_a_boffin]

The Brits are finally starting on the dismantling of their nuclear submarines that have been stored for many years at Devonport. The work will be done at the Peel Ports Inchgreen Dry Dock, west of Glasgow.

I'd always take everything Luke Pollard says with a bucket of salt. Aside from anything else, the first of our boats going through the recycling process are in Rosyth.

Both Rosyth and Devonport will be removing the LLW and ILW from within the boat, in the docks there. After that point, it is possible that they could be taken elsewhere for cutting up, but that's far from a done deal. Submarines are not known for their benign towing characteristics and a long sea tow (round Lands End and up the Irish sea or round the top of Scotland through Pentland) adds risk. I wouldn't bet against them actually being cut up on site.

[Going Boeing]

Good points N_a_B.

This is the Government position on the disposal UK Nuclear Submarine disposal (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/submarine-dismantling-project)


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1992x1416/17bafd24_765a_4ea1_b969_28a7ab9d0015_ed620b3c8d2632ae84e5dfe 5a97e6b1fd377c68d.jpeg
UK Nuclear Submarine storage at Rosyth

This article also backs up your thoughts about the dismantling likely to be done on site. Navy Lookout RN Submarine Dismantling (https://www.navylookout.com/project-to-dismantle-ex-royal-navy-nuclear-submarines-inches-forward/)

Your observation about the difficulty of towing a submarine appear to be correct which is why they fit reusable tow bridles to decommissioned US Navy submarines when they are to be moved.


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1532x1211/b47ed0ba_300c_44c0_8c3a_4d8f181e03c1_0f74a6d01688f23e2dc84e6 a84d9f42a2c1412df.jpeg
Decommissioned USS Baton Rouge fitted with a reusable tow bridle around the bow.

[Going Boeing]

It looks like the decision on which submarine and where it will be built will be announced before the next Australian Federal election is called.

Defence Minister Peter Dutton says AUKUS subs deal being fast-tracked (https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7646518/dutton-indicates-election-timed-aukus-subs-design-build-location/)



https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1639x1483/8c07c661_2025_49e3_a71a_c605708a718d_0c00503f232133c12b0e105 82cbb229022e969e5.jpeg

[rattman]

It looks like the decision on which submarine and where it will be built will be announced before the next Australian Federal election is called.


No they said it wont be announced. Navy recomended sydney or 2 locations in jervis bay (all lib seats) LNP heard Brisbane or 2 locations around wollongong (all labor seats)

[Doors Off]

No they said it wont be announced. Navy recomended sydney or 2 locations in jervis bay (all lib seats) LNP heard Brisbane or 2 locations around wollongong (all labor seats)
Jervis Bay falls in the electorate of Gilmore, which is in fact a Labor seat. Fiona Phillips is the elected member.

[rattman]

Jervis Bay falls in the electorate of Gilmore, which is in fact a Labor seat. Fiona Phillips is the elected member.

Go away with your facts. OK admit I was lazy and just assumed. Sorry

One of the locations is the a federal land reseve that was put aside for the nuclear reactor way back when.

[Doors Off]

Go away with your facts. OK admit I was lazy and just assumed. Sorry

One of the locations is the a federal land reseve that was put aside for the nuclear reactor way back when.
I know, I know, and I’m sorry. I obviously forgot it was a Rumour network. All good mate. Im pretty sure that the ole Nuke site is out of bounds, probably out the front of that base though, May be what they recommended? That said, if the rain keeps up they could put it in Katoomba.

[Asturias56]

"Navy recomended sydney"

Some thing s never change - there was tremendous reluctance of in the RN to relocating to Scapa Flow from the Firth of Forth (Edinburgh) pre WW1 largely on social grounds

and of course the DNS/DE&S organisation designing warships was in Bath - very nice to live but about as far away from a major shipyard as it was possible to get.

[tartare]

Why would you not base them in Brisbane?
Less transit time to South China Sea.

[Doors Off]

Why would you not base them in Brisbane?
Less transit time to South China Sea.
Brisbane is very shallow for quite a way out and lots of obstructions. Hence the preference for the aforementioned locations.

[golder]

As doors off said, it's shallow. Brisbane has the Great Barrier Reef. A sub base needs deep water off shore and a wide arc of travel. It looks like, built in Adelaide, a sub base near Perth and a sub base near Sydney. Sydney will fix manning issues.

[Going Boeing]

I don’t think the Barrier Reef would affect operations out of Brisbane as it ends further North.

The advantage of a Brisbane base (compared to Sydney or Port Kembla) is that it would mean 4 additional days on station per operational deployment (saving 2 transit days each way).


With an election looming, they are leaking information about this bit by bit to stay in the headlines.

New East coast nuclear submarine base to be established (https://adbr.com.au/new-east-coast-nuclear-submarine-base-to-be-established/)

[golder]

I don’t think the Barrier Reef would affect operations out of Brisbane as it ends further North.

The advantage of a Brisbane base (compared to Sydney or Port Kembla) is that it would mean 4 additional days on station per operational deployment (saving 2 transit days each way).


With an election looming, they are leaking information about this bit by bit to stay in the headlines.

New East coast nuclear submarine base to be established (https://adbr.com.au/new-east-coast-nuclear-submarine-base-to-be-established/)
They are just trying to change the conversation about their woeful response to covid. Anything is better than nothing. Their campaign will be security, strong on china. (who sold them the Darwin port, that upset the yanks at the time?) Opposition will ruin Australia, fear works on voters.

[Gne]

"Navy recomended sydney"

Some thing s never change - there was tremendous reluctance of in the RN to relocating to Scapa Flow from the Firth of Forth (Edinburgh) pre WW1 largely on social grounds

and of course the DNS/DE&S organisation designing warships was in Bath - very nice to live but about as far away from a major shipyard as it was possible to get.

Wonder why this post makes me think of a RAAF base near Newcastle.

Gne

[tartare]

Well there you go - there's a much more fundamental problem with basing the subs in Brisbane.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/mar/11/jellyfish-nuclear-submarine-emergency-reactor-shutdown-brisbane-base-moreton-bay-australia
Note to Australian Government - deployment of jellyfish as a weapon of mass destruction may be a viable option!

[SpazSinbad]

Yeah the JELLY wobblies around Brissie can be a worry. Jervis Bay is a marine national park these days: jervis bay marine park map - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=jervis+bay+marine+park+map&oq=Jervis+Bay+Ma&aqs=edge.3.0i512l5j69i57j0i512l3.10416j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

Meanwhile: Report to Congress on AUKUS Nuclear Cooperation 16 Mar 2022
https://news.usni.org/2022/03/16/report-to-congress-on-aukus-nuclear-cooperation

CRS PDF: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21420012/aukus-nuclear-cooperation-march-11-2022.pdf (0.2Mb)

[Going Boeing]

Despite a lot of “experts” saying that it is unlikely for the nuclear powered submarines to be built in Australia, the Federal Government seems determined and is pushing ahead with significant expansion of ASC Submarine construction infrastructure. They have just secured a very large parcel of land (45 hectares) adjacent to ASC North to facilitate this expansion.

Sky News interview with Simon Birmingham (https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/osborne-shipyard-will-secure-nuclearpowered-submarines/video/d283f8f5722aaa9892652cce53712bc7)


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/740x847/5026d64c_dac0_4c04_a6d1_2bfea2dd524b_73bfdfbc3fce0f07a4fac94 b85826183a1b911e4.jpeg
Land leased for ASC expansion


Defence Connect article about the land acquisition (https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/9739-osborne-shipyard-expansion-planned-for-ran-ssns)

[JeanKhul]

On Friday April 1st (today) :
"Is it true that australian taxpayers will have to pay 5,5 billions australian dollars for non-existent submarines ? " asked Senator Penny Wong (opposition leader) at Canberra.
"It will be something like that" did answer Defense Secretary Tony Dalton

Sort of cancellation fees.

[HK144]

On Friday April 1st (today) :
"Is it true that australian taxpayers will have to pay 5,5 billions australian dollars for non-existent submarines ? " asked Senator Penny Wong (opposition leader) at Canberra.
"It will be something like that" did answer Defense Secretary Tony Dalton

Sort of cancellation fees.

Election time play on words by Wong. 5.5B is what has been expended so far up to contract cancellation. Many media outlets have taken this to be that we are paying 5.5B is to severe the contract which is incorrect. The actual cancellation costs would be a fraction of this amount.

[Bengo]

$5B is better than $12B++ for boats that are not what is needed/wanted and which you are stuck with till it is politically possible to replace them.

N

[JeanKhul]

..... for boats that are not what is needed/wanted Customer changing his mind after signing the deal = not the fault of the seller/manufacturer = cancellation fee. But they can do what they want with their taxpayers' money (they probably have too much of it)

" Leak Reveals First Details Of Australia’s New AUKUS Submarine "

(Naval news, April 1st)

Australians expecting that their Navy will get Virginia or Astute class nuclear submarines have had their hopes dashed. Documents reveal that the go-forward AUKUS design will be based on an enlarged Collins Class submarine. The new class of submarine will be almost as large as the French Barracuda design (or in other words…. smaller)

[Gne]

Leak Reveals First Details Of Australia’s New AUKUS Submarine "

(Naval news, April 1st)

Australians expecting that their Navy will get Virginia or Astute class nuclear submarines have had their hopes dashed. Documents reveal that the go-forward AUKUS design will be based on an enlarged Collins Class submarine. The new class of submarine will be almost as large as the French Barracuda design (or in other words…. smaller)

Pity you did not read the entire "article" and check/recognise the significance of the date.

​​​​​​​Gne .

[Doors Off]

Leak Reveals First Details Of Australia’s New AUKUS Submarine "

(Naval news, April 1st)

Australians expecting that their Navy will get Virginia or Astute class nuclear submarines have had their hopes dashed. Documents reveal that the go-forward AUKUS design will be based on an enlarged Collins Class submarine. The new class of submarine will be almost as large as the French Barracuda design (or in other words…. smaller)

Pity you did not read the entire "article" and check/recognise the significance of the date.

Gne .

How good is April Fools!😂 Gets them every time.

[JeanKhul]

The whole story of this new submarine program is a joke. Let's wait and see you 10 years from now.

[Going Boeing]

Worth watching!

Nuclear Powered Submarines and other AUKUS Technologies - Capt Chris Skinner

[ORAC]

https://www.politico.eu/article/us-uk-australia-hypersonic-weapon/

US, UK, Australia team up on hypersonic weapons with eye on Russia and China

LONDON — The U.S., the U.K. and Australia will start joint work on hypersonic missile technology and electronic warfare capabilities under the umbrella of the AUKUS security pact.….

[JeanKhul]

Hypersonic ? It's really time to start working on it ! and US 80%, UK 19 %... and Oz 1% does seem a good plan.

Now for the huge and painful cancellation fee : dressing it up as a 1st April joke is a pityful way of denial .....

[Going Boeing]

The technology to get Scramjet engines running was developed by the University of Queensland which was further developed by DARPA. Also, an Australian company has now designed a Scramjet engine that is much simpler (with a lot less moving parts) and can be 3D printed so the cost will be brought down to a level suitable for use in missiles so Australia is contributing to the project.

JeanKhul, you appear to have an issue with the contract cancellation but it was the right decision and it occurred at a point before further commitments were required. As part of the compensation, Naval Group now has a massive assembly building in Cherbourg, France that was built by French workers and paid for by Australian taxpayers - they are still winning despite the cancellation.

[tartare]

Indeed - and it's real, and it works - unlike Russia's pathetic attempt to dress up the air-launched Iskander as some kind of new hypersonic missile.
See: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45075/americas-latest-hypersonic-cruise-missile-made-a-secret-test-flight

[Going Boeing]

Indeed - and it's real, and it works - unlike Russia's pathetic attempt to dress up the air-launched Iskander as some kind of new hypersonic missile.
See: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/45075/americas-latest-hypersonic-cruise-missile-made-a-secret-test-flight

This is why I hope the RAN selects the Virginia class SSN as its Virginia Payload Tubes will be capable of storing/launching 3 hypersonic missiles in each tube.

I believe the Astute class would require massive redesign to accommodate these missiles which are not torpedo tube compatible.

[Doors Off]

Hypersonic ? It's really time to start working on it ! and US 80%, UK 19 %... and Oz 1% does seem a good plan.

Now for the huge and painful cancellation fee : dressing it up as a 1st April joke is a pityful way of denial .....
C’mon Cobba, don’t confuse your emotions with facts. Put some of your energy from hate into learning. The Australian Aerospace industry and education sectors have been heavily involved both National and multi-National Hypersonic projectile, flightcraft and engine development for well over a decade now. This is not new, news. Google Woomera Hypersonic research, you will be pleasantly surprised about what you learn.

[rattman]

Also LM and Raytheon have been selected/agreed to be prime partners on the sovreign missile program. Dont what missiles they will acutally build locally t considering the range raytheon - Javenlin (with LM), Stinger, Tow, Iron dome, Davids sling, Tommahawk SM-2 / 6, AMMARAN, storm breaker, JSM, NASAM, Patriot (with LM) and LM have a few like spike, PrSM and LRASM

[SpazSinbad]

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1608x1050/gi_to_jb_long_ago_ebc1325c39d938020fd59f90b4133b28ab961aad.j pg

TRAWLing as one does from time to time thru the BIG PDF online I came across these five PDF pages about plans in 2017? for transferring part or all of Garden Island (G.I.) now called Fleet Base East (or somfinkdiff by now) to Jervis Bay (JB) but the Marine Park was a problem. The site shown is where the ATOMIC REACTOR was going to be built - I believe the foundations for some buildings may still be there - but I have not been at the site for a LONG TIME - now that I think of it - perhaps a car park was constructed. In the early 1970s the Reactor plus a steel mill on NW shore line started a land buying frenzy around Nowra.

[tartare]

This is why I hope the RAN selects the Virginia class SSN as its Virginia Payload Tubes will be capable of storing/launching 3 hypersonic missiles in each tube.

I believe the Astute class would require massive redesign to accommodate these missiles which are not torpedo tube compatible.

Same.
I'd be going with Uncle Sam if I was them.
If they're revealing HAWC successes now - then suspect they're well on the way with other weapons.
With help from us of course as noted by earlier posters.
Area 51 and White Sands aren't the only big, empty, sandy places around... ;)

[golder]

I think.
Virginia 138 / Astute 98 = less crew = end of story.

[tartare]

I think.
Virginia 138 / Astute 98 = less crew = end of story.

So, too costly to train and maintain the number of crew for the fleet - noting extras needed for rotation?

[ORAC]

Speaking of missiles…

https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2022/04/05/australia-accelerates-missile-upgrade-program-by-several-years/

Australia accelerates missile upgrade program by several years

[Asturias56]

Both the UK and the USA have problems building SSN's fast enough - however the US has significantly more capacity and a a programme which stretches out for far longer. They are also somewhat further ahead with the design of a possible long term replacement. It would be crazy to buy Astutes rather than Virginia's IMHO - the RAN is going to spend 99% of it's operational time working with the USN and 1% with the RN

[tartare]

So as well as new loadouts for the jets and subs, imagine there might also be a few hypersonic missile TEL vehicles roaming around the Territory a few years from now.

[ORAC]

Australia, Britain and the United States have asked Japan to join the security pact AUKUS, Sankei newspaper reported, citing multiple government sources.

AUKUS expects synergy with Japanese technologies on areas such as hypersonic weapons and electronic warfare, Sankei said.

For those amongst us who can read Japanese..

https://www.sankei.com/article/20220412-73VOZUMHBVKTFFHLLJHSZHUYQU/

[rattman]

Australia, Britain and the United States have asked Japan to join the security pact AUKUS, Sankei newspaper reported, citing multiple government sources.

AUKUS expects synergy with Japanese technologies on areas such as hypersonic weapons and electronic warfare, Sankei said.

For those amongst us who can read Japanese..

https://www.sankei.com/article/20220412-73VOZUMHBVKTFFHLLJHSZHUYQU/

Only real surprise to me is that they weren't asked from day one.

I still think an aukus +, US, UK, Aus, Japan, Singaore and SK should be created as a equals

[Gnadenburg]

Singapore? I’d prefer not. Often opportunistic and fence-sitting, and at best, a facade democracy. AUKUS is a high-end technological and security pact. I really fail to see where Singapore could be trusted.

[Captain Dart]

I suppose that would make it JAUKUS.

[layman]

Gnadenburg

agree with your comments on Singapore (a Claytons democracy?)

But ... they are "very" independent and, from admittedly old inside information (I knew someone who knew someone who ...... knew someone at the top levels of government - so very reliable !!)

Singapore are (at least used to be) paranoid about China claiming Singapore as part of their territory.

I was also told that their military usually used to go on high alert several times a year, mainly because of Malaysia (Mahathir at the time) and Indonesia (mainly Suharto), so they tended to be 'well drilled'. I don't know about since then.

[Asturias56]

"I really fail to see where Singapore could be trusted."

Jeez - if we can't trust Singapore who do we trust in Asia? Or anywhere else??

[Gnadenburg]

The context was clearly in terms of AUKUS like arrangements eg : technological transfers and weapons development. Singapore is walking a strategic tightrope between the US and China. It’s complicated and I doubt they would even want to be aligned as closely as an AUKUS type arrangement as it may jeopardise their desires for CCP treasure.

[finestkind]

Hypersonic ? It's really time to start working on it ! and US 80%, UK 19 %... and Oz 1% does seem a good plan.

Now for the huge and painful cancellation fee : dressing it up as a 1st April joke is a pityful way of denial .....


Not related to recceguy by chance?

[Asturias56]

Singapore's main strategic issues are balancing between Malaysia and Indonesia - and they keep on reasonable terms with both

China is important economically but you won't find many tears in S'pore over the movement of a lot of trading from HK - and S'pore Security is rumoured to be top rate with a lot of Israeli input

From a military point of view they run a very capable green water navy - plus a first class Air Force. I'd agree that its very unlikely they'd want SSN's - they're surrounded by really shallow water for a start so any operations would be a long way from home

[tartare]

Interesting announcement here today:
https://www.9news.com.au/national/australia-to-develop-unmanned-submarines-upgrade-missiles/9dc91a93-aa37-4111-8fb8-b69d694cac3e

[golder]

Who the F is Anduril
https://golden.com/wiki/Anduril_Industries-K4N6V4M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Luckey

[ORAC]

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/anduril-industries-buys-unmanned-submarine-maker-dive-technologies

Anduril Industries buys unmanned submarine maker Dive Technologies

[golder]

Who the F was dive technologies and their 17 employees?
https://www.linkedin.com/company/dive-technologies/

[tartare]

Loyal wingmen for the nuclear motherships.
And you don't need to be GDEB to build `em.

[Going Boeing]

The founder of the company is Palmer Luckey who developed Oculus Rift, one of the first VR sets. This decision by the ADF mirrors the Ghost Bat/Loyal Wingman program. It’s a smaller agile company doing advanced developments rapidly compared to established defence contractors. Anduril are also responsible for the USAF Advanced Battle Management Systems. Pretty impressive company to partner with and one that should be able to develop a capable XL-AUV in a relatively short timeframe.

I suspect its dimensions will be limited to what can fit on a Collins class as they will be around for quite a while.

Navy Recognition Anduril RAN XL-AUV (http://navyrecognition.com/index.php/naval-news/naval-news-archive/2022/may/11706-anduril-to-build-autonomous-undersea-vehicles-for-australian-navy.html?fbclid=IwAR2yBQjF3pKay50s_qGRIejamxz04efLYS1xpuZ0N Wd32nENQgbG2EYv09U)

[Asturias56]

Any initial thoughts from Australia on what the new Government's stance is on buying SSN's?

[Buster Hyman]

French showing their maturity I see. :hmm: But the new Government were mostly supportive on these matters, doubt there’ll be any changes re Subs.

[Doors Off]

Any initial thoughts from Australia on what the new Government's stance is on buying SSN's?

Openly, in the initial stages, it won’t change. Strategically, though our new PM and the Deputy are both proper “trade unionists”, they can’t afford to stray too far from the established norms.

[golder]

French showing their maturity I see. :hmm: But the new Government were mostly supportive on these matters, doubt there’ll be any changes re Subs.
Dummy spit is what they do best. It may take a change of leadership in France as well, to get things back on track.

[golder]

Openly, in the initial stages, it won’t change. Strategically, though our new PM and the Deputy are both proper “trade unionists”, they can’t afford to stray too far from the established norms.
There will be more pressure for it to be an onshore jobs program. Less chance of the first one or two being built overseas

[Asturias56]

Thanks folks.

[rattman]

I cant see there being any major changes to the scheme. Maybe some apologies to france and US on how ****tly our previous government handled the a announcement originally. Funny thing is I have always considered the barracuda to be in the butter zone of what i consider is optimal tonnage a crew requirment for an australian sub. A barracuda with an HEU reactors is a good option for australia. Also been warming up to the concept of getting a KSS-III from south korea, building some conventional subs to replace the collins, would allow australia to get back the skills in sub building meanwhile the design can be fettled and converted in a nuclear sub. Yes it going to be longer with more displacement, but a lot of the same systems will be able to be used

Albanese was sworn in this morning australian time and that after noon hes on a jet to Japan to meet with Biden, Modi and Japanese PM. Its for the Quad, but can imagine AUKUS will be discussed between australian and US representitives

[ORAC]

The problem being France only produces a LEU reactor, not HEU, bringing us back to the need to refuel every 5 years and being dependent on France for refuelling - which is not an acceptable risk.

If you want a sub with a reactor fuelled for its service life you need HEU, which leads you back to US/UK reactor design and supply - even if the rest of the sub is built in Australia.

[Bengo]

HEU, LEU fuelled or whatever, the design of the reactor, electrical power and propulsion units is not independent of the design of the rest of the boat. It is a fallacy to think that you can easily 'nuclearise' an existing design. If you want a nuclear powered boat buy one that was designed as a nuclear powered boat. It will be cheaper and quicker than designing a new boat that happens to have some bits that look like another conventional boat.

Systems integration is hard work.

N

[JeanKhul]

Treachery didn't bring luck to this gentleman Morrison. He will not be missed.
Now PM Albanese will have to acknowledge that there will be no subs at all for the next 10 years.

[Bengo]

Terminating a contract in accordance with that contract at a break point which was in the contract can hardly be fairly described as treachery.

N

[rattman]

The problem being France only produces a LEU reactor, not HEU, bringing us back to the need to refuel every 5 years and being dependent on France for refuelling - which is not an acceptable risk.

If you want a sub with a reactor fuelled for its service life you need HEU, which leads you back to US/UK reactor design and supply - even if the rest of the sub is built in Australia.


Its worse than that, if that just the problem that could be lived with. The issue lays with the NPT. France giving AUS reactor technology would straight up be a breech of the NPT and open australia and france to international sanctions. Thats the reason why brazil is having to design and construct its own reactors and not just use french reactors in a french submarine. So while I think a nuclear barracuda was the butter zone size sub for us, it was never going to happen

My take has always been virginia to expensive, needs to many crew and is just to much sub for us, astute no VLS. I think a 3rd option of either the new SSN(X) or some form of bespoke "regional sub" for countries like australia and possibly SK, Japan or india in the asian pacific or italy, germany or other europeans

[golder]

Treachery didn't bring luck to this gentleman Morrison. He will not be missed.
Now PM Albanese will have to acknowledge that there will be no subs at all for the next 10 years.
What part of this is so hard to understand? Isn't 7 months notice enough?
February 2021.
https://indaily.com.au/news/2021/02/25/what-we-know-today-thursday-february-25/
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has ordered a high-level study level to determine how to terminate the $90 billion contract, while considering the alternative options of contracting Swedish shipbuilder Saab Kockums or refurbishing the Australian Navy's current Collins-class fleet.

[Asturias56]

"I think a 3rd option of either the new SSN(X) or some form of bespoke "regional sub" for countries like australia and possibly SK, Japan or india"

Problem is in the execution - the UK, USA & France have been building SSN's etc for nearly 70 years and they ALL have problems with every new design

trying to build up expertise from scratch is a very long and incredibly expensive road - and there's absolutely no point in building something that's as good as the USN Nautilus in 2030 - you have to be close to world standard from the start. Buy or rent the first few boats

[Flap Track 6]

astute no VLS.
I've long considered the lack of VLS on Astute class to be a major short sighted design flaw as you're stuck with only horizontal launch weapons. Interesting to note that the RAN and RN are talking to Raytheon about reopening the TTL Tomahawk production line to remain relevant in the land attack role.

[rattman]

Kinda AUKUS related

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/strike-air-combat/10082-us-greenlights-proposed-himars-rocket-launcher-sale-to-australia

We now will have something to shoot PrSM from

[fdr]

Back in the day, the boats that were a pain to track were the SS/SSKs, Nukuler boats were decidedly easier, but they have improved the radiated noise of the SSN/SSGN/SSBNs.... Still, the thing with subs is they are disruptive even when their presence is just unknown. Between nuke and fuel cell, I'd still go conventional, but it just doesn't have the same headline appeal to pollies. Aussie needs a substantial fleet of boats, either flavor, but numbers are needed IMHO.

Out in the boonies one day tracking a Victor-III (wiktor.. for trekkues...) our engineer in the center lounge chair spills his coffee pointing out an attack periscope of decidedly non-Russian plumage.... As the mission green had decidedly no friendly boats in the intel, we spent the next 3 hours pinging the stuffing out of the boat, along with passive tracking. Debriefing included a surprise visit by a pretty unhappy foreign military attache flown in at short notice, explaining the presence of their nuke. FWIW, it was definitely quieter than the "Wiktor" , which was pretty confused by the activity around his baffles. ASW/ISR had its moments.

"Dolphin 22"

(22. Submarines never cheat and rarely lie.)

[Going Boeing]

Back in the day, the boats that were a pain to track were the SS/SSKs, Nukuler boats were decidedly easier, but they have improved the radiated noise of the SSN/SSGN/SSBNs.... Still, the thing with subs is they are disruptive even when their presence is just unknown. Between nuke and fuel cell, I'd still go conventional, but it just doesn't have the same headline appeal to pollies. Aussie needs a substantial fleet of boats, either flavor, but numbers are needed IMHO.

The “track-ability” of SSN’s has got significantly more difficult with modern reactors that use convective cooling which means the coolant pumps only operate when high power/speed is required. The Virginia class’ S9G reactor and the new RR PWR3 have this capability (not the PWR2). There are a number of other new technologies, such as Shaftless Submarine Drive (SSD) being developed so we are now getting to the stage where they are much more difficult to detect and track than conventional submarines. The USS South Dakota was built with a lot of new technologies (which aren’t discussed publicly) and, if they prove to be successful, they will be included in the Block 5 Virginia’s & subsequent submarines.

These developments are making the technology in the Astute class look outdated and the lack of vertical payload tubes means that they would not be able to keep pace with weapon & UUV developments throughout their service life.

[tartare]

Part of Biden's accession to AUKUS and sharing the technology was a guarantee of bi-partisan, long term commitment.
I'd wager you won't see any change from the Albanese administration.
And I personally hope they opt for the Virginia class - for the reasons explained above.

[West Coast]

Between nuke and fuel cell, I'd still go conventional

Wouldn’t you need to know the mission before you make the decision?

[tartare]

Interesting piece on ABC here last night about retired submariners calling for an interim `son of Collins' class to be built before the nuke boats - to fill the `submarine gap' between now and the nuke boats arriving in the 2040s.
Not a lot of discussion about these or similar as an interim stop gap?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navys-85-foot-orca-unmanned-submarine-will-be-a-minelayer-first
Am assuming large UUVs will develop and evolve enormously over the next 20 years.
Much cheaper than a crewed boat I would have thought?
Oz may even be able to build it's own...

Navy requirements indicate the UUV will also perform underwater surveillance, electronic warfare, and minesweeping missions. Beyond that, it is planned for Orca to be able to do everything from launching cruise missiles and aerial drones to hunting submarines in the future.

[Going Boeing]

There are so many factors involved with the selection and subsequent construction of the RAN’s SSN’s, one of them is what steel is to be used in the pressure hull. Obviously, strength is the primary consideration but there are a number of other factors such as corrosion resistance, reduced magnetic field disturbance, etc and DST has been involved in the research to find the optimum steel alloy as part of the planned Attack class build process. According to this Australian Defence (https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/sea/deep-dive-into-underwater-material-advances) article, Bissalloy delivered 250 tonnes of a moly steel that had been found to have the best balance of properties for prototyping work before the Attack class was cancelled. Bissalloy had been involved (with Bluescope) in the development and supply of the steel used in construction of the Collins class which has proven to meet all the requirements, including longevity with the imminent Life of Type Extension (LOTE).

Now that the focus has switched to the future SSN’s, the selection of steel takes on another dimension. The Astute class is manufactured from British Q1N grade steel which has similar strength to the HY80 used in the Los Angeles class and the Virginia class has HY100 steel which is stronger but is difficult to weld and requires special welding techniques. The BIS812EMA steel used in the Collins is a little bit stronger (including bulge testing) than HY100 and has a lot of improved properties, including being lighter and easier to weld. An advanced version of this would make a good choice for the SSN’s but then creates more design decisions as it’s slightly lighter and thus affects the ballast requirements of the vessels. It could also cause more complex issues if sections of the vessel have to be constructed overseas, eg, if the Virginia class is chosen and it was decided that the hull section containing the reactor compartment is to be manufactured in the US, would a section made from HY100 be able to be welded to hull sections made from a different steel, or would the Bissalloy steel have to be shipped to the US for use in their construction of the reactor hull section? This would require them to adjust to different handling and welding techniques from those currently in use.

When people scoff at the idea of local steel being used instead of the OE steel, the US discovered that substandard steel was used for building Navy submarines between 1985 and 2017, a problem that investigators discovered in 2017 and that was first reported in 2020 so, we would be able to better manage quality control of the steel locally.

The following table gives an indication of steels used in submarine construction.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x2000/50e0398d_aa07_4fd4_9bbf_507ab4d989a3_7928be355116550bf883f12 f31717abde5de4ffa.jpeg
Table courtesy of Submarine Matters

[Going Boeing]

Interesting piece on ABC here last night about retired submariners calling for an interim `son of Collins' class to be built before the nuke boats - to fill the `submarine gap' between now and the nuke boats arriving in the 2040s.
Not a lot of discussion about these or similar as an interim stop gap?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navys-85-foot-orca-unmanned-submarine-will-be-a-minelayer-first
Am assuming large UUVs will develop and evolve enormously over the next 20 years.
Much cheaper than a crewed boat I would have thought?
Oz may even be able to build it's own...

Navy requirements indicate the UUV will also perform underwater surveillance, electronic warfare, and minesweeping missions. Beyond that, it is planned for Orca to be able to do everything from launching cruise missiles and aerial drones to hunting submarines in the future.

I totally agree.

Developing a “Son of Collins” would divert resources and funds from the SSN program so it makes sense to augment the Collins with high capability UUV’s with much lower acquisition and operating costs.

In fact, they’ve already started buying some with 3 ordered from Anduril. It will be interesting to see if they are sized to fit on the aft deck of the Collins or will operate autonomously from their base.

Anduril Autonomous Submarines (https://breakingdefense.com/2022/05/anduril-bets-it-can-build-3-large-autonomous-subs-for-aussies-in-3-years/)

[SRFred]

I'd wager you won't see any change from the Albanese administration.


What you don't think they'd consider a Chinese design?

[Doors Off]

What you don't think they'd consider a Chinese design?

The new Minister for Defence (and Deputy Chairman of Australia) Richard Marles MP, is a deft hand at visiting and negotiating with the parent committee in the CCCP, so we should get a good deal on the Chinese subs. He was an odd pick for Minister of Defence.

[tartare]

Funny - I thought I was on the Military aircrew forum - and not Jet Blast, or that pit of acid Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific?
Hey ho...

[golder]

The new Minister for Defence (and Deputy Chairman of Australia) Richard Marles MP, is a deft hand at visiting and negotiating with the parent committee in the CCCP, so we should get a good deal on the Chinese subs. He was an odd pick for Minister of Defence.
That is inconsistent with the AFR views from wiki
"The 12 Labor figures who will do the heavy lifting in government" (https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/the-12-labor-figures-who-will-do-the-heavy-lifting-in-government-20181213-h1937u). The Australian Financial Review (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Australian_Financial_Review). 14 December 2018. Retrieved 22 December 2019. Marles is very pro-US and a touch hawkish on China

[tartare]

Interesting development in the region - and related:
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/u-s-and-south-korean-cooperation-on-nuclear-technology-positive-sign-for-k-ssn/

[rattman]

Interesting development in the region - and related:
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/06/u-s-and-south-korean-cooperation-on-nuclear-technology-positive-sign-for-k-ssn/

Yep been saying since day dot, that a smaller regional SSN for australia, south korea and possibly Japan might well be a better longer term plan. Maybe even some europeans as well

[golder]

Yep been saying since day dot, that a smaller regional SSN for australia, south korea and possibly Japan might well be a better longer term plan. Maybe even some europeans as well
300 mw reactor isn't small.

[rattman]

300 mw reactor isn't small.

Small sub compared to the size of virginia's, virginia is to much sub and to much manpower for australia, astute doesn't have VLS. Australia needs something about 4K-6K tons displacement with VLS. Hence the comment a smaller (not small) Regional sub

[SpazSinbad]

Yes Virginia Class there is a Santa Clause AUKUS mebbe: Plan to get nuclear submarines faster (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/plan-to-get-nuclear-submarines-faster/ar-AAYeyDI?bk=1&ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=85657d11663d48368460b8e368051b9f)

[Gnadenburg]

There’s a real sub-surface battle going on now. An interim capability for the RAN. Labor’s left and the Greens are pushing it and once it arrives good-bye SSN’s. It will go the way of the Raptor- remember Labor lambasting the interim Super Hornet arrangement going to an election saying they’d look at the Raptor? All BS. Just like their support for SSN’s.

[golder]

There’s a real sub-surface battle going on now. An interim capability for the RAN. Labor’s left and the Greens are pushing it and once it arrives good-bye SSN’s.

It will go the way of the Raptor- remember Labor lambasting the interim Super Hornet arrangement going to an election saying they’d look at the Raptor? All BS. Just like their support for SSN’s.


Do you have a substantive link to this about the sub, or is this your guess? I haven't heard this said.
Your post is more like a disgruntled liberal voter, rather than a military point of view

I remember the Super hornet too. In parliament the RAAF said they were unneeded to replace the F-111.
The Raptor was in reference to the F-35 and just something to say in the election run up.

I actually think it reflects badly on Dutton to voice this info on the sub negotiations in opposition. It's not a good start to his being leader of the opposition.

[Gnadenburg]

I’m not a fan of rigid partisan politics so no, I’m not a disgruntled Liberal voter. I have no link or proof though none I know from Labor’s left want nuclear submarines. The Greens have stated as much.

Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.

I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.

[tartare]

Nah - don't buy that assertion.
I reckon Labor will stick with the SSNs - this is a decision that's much bigger, broader and long term than Richard Marles.
The much bigger problem is the capability gap in my view.
They face Sophie's choice.
Go with an interim fleet to maintain your numbers of submariners and you massively blow your budget.
Go with an XLUUV and you're banking on technology that's only just being developed - and don't end up with enough crews when the SSNs finally arrive.
Buy the B-21 and you have a combination of the two above.
The two Virginia boats would have been an ideal solution if the Yanks had agreed.
As for Dutton - the man's a 100 IQ unreconstructed Queensland policeman and nowt more.
Genius self-inflicted move by the Coalition electing him - totally unpalatable to the broader electorate.

ADDING: Australia is ‘not going to back out of’ AUKUS deal: BurkeBy Ashleigh McMillan and Anthony GallowayLeader of the House Tony Burke says the Albanese government is committed to the AUKUS deal, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the US and Britain.

“We’re signed up to AUKUS and Anthony [Albanese] was straight across to the Quad meeting, and the relationship with our key ally in the United States was affirmed immediately,” he told Today on Friday morning.

[rattman]

I’m not a fan of rigid partisan politics so no, I’m not a disgruntled Liberal voter.

You are a die hard liberal voter I guess then, like that ignore that one of the liberal members was actually an actual member of the CCP.

CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.

Libs lost the solomons to china, penny wong with in days of becoming foreign minister did a lighting tour of the pacific and forced the chinese FM to call off his trip.

Glad to have the adults back at the steering wheel now

[golder]

I’m not a fan of rigid partisan politics so no, I’m not a disgruntled Liberal voter. I have no link or proof though none I know from Labor’s left want nuclear submarines. The Greens have stated as much.

Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.

I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
So you just threw Labor in for fun and do the Greens want any submarine? Yet you say Marles is a traitor to Australia and is a puppet loyal to China. I think you should be posting this on the 'Jet Blast' board here. It has only a thin disguise to military procurement. The internet has Maries as pro-US and a China hawk. I don't think he can be both, but it does raise the question. Do we want a hawk as a defence minister?

Now back to AUKUS. Dutton was talking of leasing subs as an interim filler. There won't be a purchase yet, we haven't even decided what one to get. Going by the US figures. You need 3.5 nuke submarines, to keep one in the water. The other 2.5 are in a maintenance cycle. We definitely won't be buying and running 3 classes of submarines, Where 2 Virginia's doesn't keep one in the water. As well as the Collins we retire from their aprox 22 year refit and service timeline from 2026. That takes us nearly to 2050 for the last sub, if we don't do another life extension. On some or all, if the hulls can handle it.

There is also the RAN that have said they can gap-fill a possible Collins shortfall, with other 'weapon systems'. Said in parliament when they cancelled the Skyguardian.

[Gnadenburg]

Marles’ “open-mind” on an interim submarine capability is the slow death of RAN’s nuclear ambitions. I’m guessing that’s why Dutton’s came out in the national newspaper with an capability gap solution that can actually be met with an earlier purchase of two nuclear boats and US Navy SSN detachments in Australia. Labor firmly behind SSN’s? Let’s wait and see!

Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.

[rattman]

Marles’ “open-mind” on an interim submarine capability is the slow death of RAN’s nuclear ambitions. I’m guessing that’s why Dutton’s came out in the national newspaper with an capability gap solution that can actually be met with an earlier purchase of two nuclear boats and US Navy SSN detachments in Australia. Labor firmly behind SSN’s? Let’s wait and see!

Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.


No dutton came out with a comment that was never being discussed and that he has no ability or capabilty to implement neither does labor because its physically impossible

You were the one that bought the BUT LABOR argument. Thats why I shot down yours and dutton rubbish opinion, you started the bull**** political agruement by saying hes pro china.

You are a liberal / CCP stooge, I dont believe anything you have said

[HK144]

If you clowns are going to have a go at each other with Labor v Liberal or vice versa name calling, how about you take it to a more appropriate media platform such as the cesspools of FB and/or Twitter.

[Gnadenburg]

Yes I agree.

However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.

[rattman]

Yes I agree.

However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.


You were the one who who started the mud slinging. It does have bi - partisan support for the concept. The undercurrent existed with in hours of the aukus announcement. Its seems the libs failed to tell the navy about the plan, with the exception of a few shiney bums. The admiral in charge of the a attack class only found at the announcement. they also failed to tell the french and lied to Biden. The actual claim we will buying virginia's is almost complete rubbish and it wont be 3 subs, the interim will replace the collins class so it would be 2 at most

[Buster Hyman]

Revisionist history is alive and well again. Not even a month into their term! :rolleyes:

[SpazSinbad]

History written with payout: Australian government agrees to pay $835 million to French submarine contractor Naval Group over cancelled contract

Australian government agrees to pay $835 million to French submarine contractor Naval Group over cancelled contract (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/australian-government-agrees-to-pay-835-million-to-french-submarine-contractor-naval-group-over-cancelled-contract/ar-AAYkySM?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=d6d769a3c8114c45b56abba3b75fb2fd)

"...Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the announcement this morning, saying the total amount of money spent by Australian taxpayers on the program is now $3.4 billion. "This is a saving from the $5.5 billion that Senate estimates was told would result from that program," Mr Albanese said...."

[Gnadenburg]

You were the one who who started the mud slinging.

Nope, I just said I didn’t trust Marles, worried that his political heartland is anti-nuclear and an interim sub’ will mean the end of the RAN’s SSN ambitions. It’s just an opinion. If you were going to kill off the SSN plan, that would be the way to do it.


I never once abused a contributor to the discussion labelling them a political or disgruntled stooge or even more bizarrely a stooge of the CCP.

My opinion is the only hope for RAN SSN’s is the Dutton-plan or Dutton-Pie In The Sky or the Dutton-outburst in The Australian, suggesting a buy off the US production line. Hopefully that appeases the tribalism of Aussie politics. I can’t see this project getting less political as the realities and complications present.

[Asturias56]

Anything with "N" in it is expensive, takes many years and overruns - same in every country.

Problem in any democracy is that the political horizon is max 4 years - and all that money sloshing about is very tempting for those who wish to buy votes (sorry - meet the concerns of their core supporters of course)

Dutton's plan at least gets a capability in place for (relatively) little money - certainly cheaper than going the "interim" route even I'll bet.

[JeanKhul]

The French get their cash - a bit chunk of Aussie taxpayers money - and are therefore happy to be out of this mess.

And RAN will get modern subs (nuclear or not ? US or UK ? still much to debate) within 15 years from now.

[golder]

The French get their cash - a bit chunk of Aussie taxpayers money - and are therefore happy to be out of this mess.

And RAN will get modern subs (nuclear or not ? US or UK ? still much to debate) within 15 years from now.
Do you visit many French sites? They are still having a tantrum. The total cost was around 5 billion. 10% of this was an exit fee paid to France. I think we came out OK. The 5 billion is about 5% of what the Nukes subs will cost over their life. Some see the Nukes subs to be worth more than conventional subs. Given the poor planning and mis-steps, overall it will be alright. We currently have an annual $48.6 billion military budget.

[RickNRoll]

Dutton thinks that the Americans will give us two subs out of their already scheduled production run. I don't think so.

[golder]

They gave us 24 super hornets out of the USN already scheduled production run. They say we are a close.

[ORAC]

They aren’t short of bugs and can order more.

Measwhile the USN has a massive deficit in SSN subs which will only get worse. They are working desperately to try and increase production of the Virginia class from 2 to 3 a year and are looking at ordering an extra 10 block V/VI at the expense of pushing the building of the SSNX Seawolf replacement hunter-killer to the right.

Not saying it can’t be done - but it would be a very hard sell in Congress. More chance of getting few forward based in Australia with some exchange crew to get used to working with nuclear subs - and the locals used to them.

[rattman]

They aren’t short of bugs and can order more.

Measwhile the USN has a massive deficit in SSN subs which will only get worse. They are working desperately to try and increase production of the Virginia class from 2 to 3 a year and are looking at ordering an extra 10 block V/VI at the expense of pushing the building of the SSNX Seawolf replacement hunter-killer to the right.

Not saying it can’t be done - but it would be a very hard sell in Congress. More chance of getting few forward based in Australia with some exchange crew to get used to working with nuclear subs - and the locals used to them.

Yeah the US just magicing up 2 extra subs from somewhere was never going to happen, more likely for me if they do decide to go virginia, which I think is not going to happen that 2-4 of early block 1 from hawaii will be foward deployed to somewhere in australia. There will be a mixed RAN / USN crew for them

Also bill in the US for RAN personal to access US training facilites
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/06/16/new-bill-would-establish-aukus-submarine-training-program/

[SpazSinbad]

ASLO (yes I know) to above report: "...“It is imperative that we strengthen our undersea capabilities and increase submarine production for our [U.S.] national security interests, and the training exchange program outlined in the legislation will help us achieve that goal,” Moore [Blake Moore (R-Utah)] said in a statement about the bill." https://news.usni.org/2022/06/15/new-aukus-caucus-bill-calls-for-u-s-australia-sub-training-pipeline

[golder]

I previously said I think we will get the Astute subs. I still lean that way. Simply because of lifetime costs and manning

The supers were a while ago and it was a big deal at the time. I wouldn't discount the event. I would love to hear about all the other times, the US has given a country equipment out of their run. I don't know of any, but I haven't deeply looked either.

The shipyards have said, they will invest in infrastructure to build 3 Virginias a year, if they get a fixed multiyear order.

I wouldn't totally discount the possibility of the US giving us 2 Virginias out of their run, but that isn't what Dutton said, was it? He said we could 'get' 2 by 2030. He also earlier talked about leasing.
His oped was vague and politically motivated, in my opinion.

[Asturias56]

The Brits got some U-2's very early................... but they were probably on lease

I'd suspect the US will lease 2 older Virginias (which al least you know are worked up and have the bugs rung out) and add a couple to their run. The Astutes are coming of a single, very slow line that is needed for other things by the RN. Remember they are building a class of 7 boats - the first one was laid down over 20 years ago and they are still building the last two.

[golder]

Different story to the supers. The brit pilots were on exchange to the US to fly the U-2. Later the brits acquired the U-2 they were flying, in part to run separate programs.
Aussie pilots are on exchange to the F-22, only we aren't given any.

[golder]

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/10198-watch-this-space-aukus-subs-announcement-nears
An announcement on Australia’s nuclear-powered submarine program is due “shortly”, according to the chief White House adviser for the Indo-Pacific.

[rattman]

Totaly missed this announcement

The admiral who oversees U.S. attack submarine construction has been appointed to lead the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) partnership that promises to develop a nuclear-powered attack boat for the Royal Australian Navy, the Department of the Navy announced Friday.

Seems more and more likely virginia's are in the RAN's future

[Going Boeing]

As per this article. It certainly shows that the USN and US Government are fully behind this project so I don’t think there will be any political factors blocking this project.

https://news.usni.org/2022/06/22/navy-submarine-peo-goggins-to-lead-american-aukus-effort-says-secnav

[Going Boeing]

More positive signs from a senior USN advisor.

https://news.yahoo.com/us-helping-australia-stand-nuclear-093100591.html

[rattman]

Richard Marles, Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister did a speech to CSIS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TslUJ4MXIv0

[golder]

https://spacenews.com/nro-space-missions-mark-new-level-of-us-australia-cooperation/NRO space missions mark new level of US-Australia cooperationNROL-162 and NROL-199 carry spy satellites built and operated jointly by the U.S. and AustraliaWASHINGTON — Rocket Lab on July 13 launched (https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220713005416/en/Rocket-Lab-Successfully-Launches-First-of-Two-Responsive-Space-Missions-for-the-National-Reconnaissance-Office) the NROL-162 mission for the U.S. National Reconnaissance Office from the company’s launch complex in New Zealand. NROL-162 is the first of two NRO missions the agency developed in partnership with the Australian Department of Defence.

The second one, NROL-199, is planned for July 22. Both missions are classified spy satellites that the U.S. intelligence agency developed jointly with the Australian government.

The partnership with Australia is part of a broader effort by the National Reconnaissance Office to have a more integrated space architecture to support U.S. and allies’ surveillance needs. The NRO recently announced a similar partnership with the United Kingdom (https://spacenews.com/national-reconnaissance-office-to-launch-mission-on-virgin-orbit-rocket-from-u-k-spaceport/).

[tartare]

Well, `straya already owns at least one of the big SIGINT birds up there - so this adds to that.

[golder]

That was also with the US, We put one up into the network and we got access to all the network. AUKUS also gives us access to another network, that I saw Dutton announce at the time. I don't know if this is related to that.

[Buster Hyman]

Both missions are classified spy satellites that the U.S. intelligence agency developed jointly with the Australian government.
If it was developed by Aussies, then that's a lot of effort to find Speed Cameras!

[SpazSinbad]

14 Jul 2022: Australia to Pick Nuclear Submarine Design in Early 2023, Says Official - USNI News (https://news.usni.org/2022/07/14/australia-to-pick-nuclear-submarine-design-in-early-2023-says-official)
"WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Australian government is set to announce the design for its first nuclear submarine in the first quarter of 2023, its deputy prime minister and defense minister said Thursday. Canberra is also looking to see how it can speed up the process for getting the chosen submarine built and deployed, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said on Thursday...."

[tartare]

Well, one former SAS Captain is speaking with great authority on the topic:
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/britain-should-try-to-build-australia-s-first-nuclear-subs-andrew-hastie-20220716-p5b22i.html

[Going Boeing]

Andrew Hastie may have a military background but, he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know.

The PWR2 reactor doesn’t meet modern safety requirements & the PWR3 is reported as not being able to be modified to fit the Astute hull. Nuclear reactors require a lot of lead time to process the fuel and certainly can’t be done in the timeframe that he is indicating. The PWR2 Core H only has a 25 year life in comparison with the S9G reactor’s 33 years & the Virginia can cruise with just convective reactor cooling whilst the Astute needs to run coolant pumps at all times. There’s a huge difference in performance and capability of these two submarines.

I suspect his comments are of a political nature aimed for widespread consumption of the masses (& possibly to establish political friendships in the UK).

[tartare]

My thoughts exactly... he should stick to speaking about soldiering.
There's only one boat Australia should get in my view... and it ain't the Astute.

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1549743942513659904?s=21&t=ykMNL32D6qg8ISygZUn2CQ
"The prospect of British submarines being based out of Perth with Australian sailors on board to undergo nuclear training will be advanced, with the head of the UK military to hold top-level talks with Australian officials next week."

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/military-chiefs-to-hold-talks-on-basing-uk-nuclear-submarines-in-perth-20220720-p5b36w

Military chiefs to hold talks on basing UK nuclear submarines in Perth

[tartare]

Yep - not surprised by that.
I suspect you'll see both British and American boats moving through Perth on a regular basis from now on.
Interesting backgrounder here on the similarities/differences between the two boats.
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/astute-versus-virginia-which-nuclear-powered-sub-is-the-best-fit-for-australia/
Payload and combat system a significant tick for the Virginia class I would argue.
And that said - noting there'll be no capacity for Britain to build any Australian boats in the near future, this report makes for sobering reading on the US ability to even supply it's own needs:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL32418

[SpazSinbad]

Another 22 Jul 2022 report:
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/fleet-of-nuclear-submarines-will-be-sent-by-britain-to-australia-as-a-warning-to-china/ar-AAZPBMG (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/fleet-of-nuclear-submarines-will-be-sent-by-britain-to-australia-as-a-warning-to-china/ar-AAZPBMG?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=341887917bf44f40b6e1f91b21222697)
"...Last night the MoD said: ‘It is UK policy that we do not comment on matters relating to submarine activity or operations.’"

[golder]

Yep - not surprised by that.
I suspect you'll see both British and American boats moving through Perth on a regular basis from now on.
Interesting backgrounder here on the similarities/differences between the two boats.
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/astute-versus-virginia-which-nuclear-powered-sub-is-the-best-fit-for-australia/
Payload and combat system a significant tick for the Virginia class I would argue.
And that said - noting there'll be no capacity for Britain to build any Australian boats in the near future, this report makes for sobering reading on the US ability to even supply it's own needs:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL32418
If they get a firm ongoing order. The yard has said it can increase and build 3 Virginia's a year. Refer to Usni

[Asturias56]

"The yard has said it can increase and build 3 Virginia's a year. "

Well of course they have - but CAN they ? over the last 30 years getting vessels of any type out of any yard anywhere on time and cost has been a bit fraught. And all the N sub makers have had serious issues.

The fastest way for the RAN is to takeover some early Virginias on lease -that will minimise impact on the USN and allow the RAN to get up to speed with the very different operating environment of an SSN

[Going Boeing]

If they get a firm ongoing order. The yard has said it can increase and build 3 Virginia's a year. Refer to Usni

That’s not what they are telling Congress, the fact that construction of the Columbia class SSBN has absolute priority over every other military program has meant that most of the skilled workers at GDEB & HII have been moved onto that program so the completion and delivery of new Virginia SSN’s has been adversely affected with significant delays being experienced, especially with the Block 5 boats. They are currently unable to deliver 2 Virginia’s per annum as they can’t find sufficient staff and get them trained to a competent level.

It also indicates that they will struggle to release skilled managers to loan to ASC for the construction at Osborne.

As far as getting RAN personnel up to speed on Nukes, I suspect that the USN may end up home porting 2 Virginia’s at Fleet Base West. These vessels would be manned with experienced USN trainers and RAN submariners and would be deployed on normal USN missions. In this way, the USN would retain their critically needed submarines but assist the RAN in getting sufficient submariners trained before the ASC built vessels enter service. This obviously assumes that the RAN & Government choose the Virginia over the Astute.

[rattman]

That’s not what they are telling Congress, the fact that construction of the Columbia class SSBN has absolute priority over every other military program has meant that most of the skilled workers at GDEB & HII have been moved onto that program so the completion and delivery of new Virginia SSN’s has been adversely affected with significant delays being experienced, especially with the Block 5 boats. They are currently unable to deliver 2 Virginia’s per annum as they can’t find sufficient staff and get them trained to a competent level.

It also indicates that they will struggle to release skilled managers to loan to ASC for the construction at Osborne.

As far as getting RAN personnel up to speed on Nukes, I suspect that the USN may end up home porting 2 Virginia’s at Fleet Base West. These vessels would be manned with experienced USN trainers and RAN submariners and would be deployed on normal USN missions. In this way, the USN would retain their critically needed submarines but assist the RAN in getting sufficient submariners trained before the ASC built vessels enter service. This obviously assumes that the RAN & Government choose the Virginia over the Astute.


I pretty much agree with what you said, a somewhat interesting side note. I have a friend who applied for and looks to have a been successful (accepted by previous govt but not yet confirmed by new govt) for the 20K grant to study nuclear engineering. He seems to believe that Australians will mostly be going to the UK nuclear engineering school as they have more spare capacity than the american school does atm. Also most of the sub officers goto either british or dutch perisher

[Imagegear]

If it were only about the boat, this decision would be a no-brainer.

But it is not. Perhaps this article has been fielded before, but it gives an idea of the magnitude of the decision.

Virginia vs Astute (https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/astute-versus-virginia-which-nuclear-powered-sub-is-the-best-fit-for-australia/)

IG

[golder]

That’s not what they are telling Congress, the fact that construction of the Columbia class SSBN has absolute priority over every other military program has meant that most of the skilled workers at GDEB & HII have been moved onto that program so the completion and delivery of new Virginia SSN’s has been adversely affected with significant delays being experienced, especially with the Block 5 boats. They are currently unable to deliver 2 Virginia’s per annum as they can’t find sufficient staff and get them trained to a competent level.

A lot is how they talk to congress. they do the same with the F-35.They do say they can ramp up to 3
https://news.usni.org/2020/11/18/navy-confident-it-could-build-3-virginia-ssns-a-year-though-more-study-needed-on-shipyard-capacity
The Navy has “full confidence we can ramp up” to building three attack submarines per year if the Navy buildup proposed by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper were to be enacted, despite ongoing delays in Block IV Virginia-class construction, the program executive officer for submarines said today.

[ORAC]

Contractors always swear they can perform up to the moment the contract is signed - then the delays are always factors outside their control, especially the inevitable contract changes…

[golder]

It is the USN and Defense Secretary Mark Esper saying it. The contractor wants a firm order before they spend their money on infrastructure

[Asturias56]

That's what they say but "despite ongoing delays in Block IV Virginia-class construction, " shows there is still a problem with current build rates.

As I've said NO country is able to deliver SSN/'s and SSBN's on time - they are extremely complex bits of kit

[rattman]

That's what they say but "despite ongoing delays in Block IV Virginia-class construction, " shows there is still a problem with current build rates.

As I've said NO country is able to deliver SSN/'s and SSBN's on time - they are extremely complex bits of kit

Pretty sure all the early virginia's were on time, or close enough for government work. They block V's have been delayed but all the a earlier blocks have been near enough to on schedule. The block V are having issues because of covid and being ordered to a prioritise the columbia class

[golder]

Part of the reason is that some lifetime parts aren't lasting a lifetime. They were stolen from current build and they are now delayed till the new replacement parts come.

[JeanKhul]

Aussies will never get nuclear subs - painful, but so obvious.
The only thing they can dream about, would be leasing some UK our US subs - or asking them to stop from time to time in Darwin or Perth - and put a RAN flag on top, for the duration of the stopover. Maximum.

[Tocsin]

Aussies will never get nuclear subs - painful, but so obvious.
The only thing they can dream about, would be leasing some UK our US subs - or asking them to stop from time to time in Darwin or Perth - and put a RAN flag on top, for the duration of the stopover. Maximum.

French grapes are so sour...

[HK144]

Aussies will never get nuclear subs - painful, but so obvious.
The only thing they can dream about, would be leasing some UK our US subs - or asking them to stop from time to time in Darwin or Perth - and put a RAN flag on top, for the duration of the stopover. Maximum.

Get out of le bed on the wrong side did we?

[Buster Hyman]

Aussies will never get nuclear subs - painful, but so obvious.
The only thing they can dream about, would be leasing some UK our US subs - or asking them to stop from time to time in Darwin or Perth - and put a RAN flag on top, for the duration of the stopover. Maximum.
Better than a White one.

[BBadanov]

Aussies will never get nuclear subs - painful, but so obvious.
The only thing they can dream about, would be leasing some UK our US subs - or asking them to stop from time to time in Darwin or Perth - and put a RAN flag on top, for the duration of the stopover. Maximum.
Unfortunately, I may agree with our Froggie mate here.
With a Labor Govt in now (who never really want to talk nuke), and with our appalling and delayed procurement process, and the limited SSN supply pool, and the virtual lack of an AUS nuke industry and knowledge, nuke subs are not only a way off - but also delays will likely lead to a lack of interest as the project falls by the wayside.
But there is much benefit in ongoing AUKUS 3-eyes common procurement (of airframes for instance), intel, basing, networking, policy, procedures, exercises, operations, and dialog.

[tartare]

Unfortunately, I may agree with our Froggie mate here.
With a Labor Govt in now (who never really want to talk nuke), and with our appalling and delayed procurement process, and the limited SSN supply pool, and the virtual lack of an AUS nuke industry and knowledge, nuke subs are not only a way off - but also delays will likely lead to a lack of interest as the project falls by the wayside.
But there is much benefit in ongoing AUKUS 3-eyes common procurement (of airframes for instance), intel, basing, networking, policy, procedures, exercises, operations, and dialog.

Nah - disagree.
The fact we have a Labor government has nothing to do with whether the subs will arrive.
AUKUS was the only thing those useless, do nothing muppets who were booted out did of any note.
Trust God, not Government? That's the calibre of leader we had for the last decade.
The adults who are now in charge are committed to the nuclear boats, and they'll arrive, despite the whining.
Might be a while, but the geopolitics of the region over the next few decades mean they're essential.

[JeanKhul]

Better than a White one.

Never raised a white one ? Singapore / Feb 1942
Never re-embarked in a rush ? Dunkirk, Gallipoli.....
Let's try to keep it to the sub subject.
There has been a major government change down under, so now the failure of the process can be offloaded to the previous one.
Being in need of nuclear subs is not the same as operating them, not even building.

[rattman]

There has been a major government change down under, so now the failure of the process can be offloaded to the previous one.
Being in need of nuclear subs is not the same as operating them, not even building.

Labor wont dump the project, its one of the few things the liberals did that is popular with majority of Australians. Last figures I saw it had 60-70% popularity, it was a not insubstantial amount of greens, which is why that after a few hours of criticising it the greens leader went AFK on the subject, polling came out it was popular even with greens voters

[Buster Hyman]

Never raised a white one ?
My bad. Capitulated & changed sides. :ok:

But sure, let's try to keep it to the sub subject.

[Asturias56]

"did that is popular with majority of Australians. Last figures I saw it had 60-70% popularity,"

But in a few years the bills start to arrive, the media run "ANOTHER VAST Cost Overrun" and the Liberals start criticising because there is an election coming up and any stick will do t beat on the incumbents

​​​​​​​best thing would be to lease one ASAP and get it showing the flag Doesn't have to be an Astute or a Virginia - borrow one of the RN Trafalgar's that are coming out of service - just get started

[Not_a_boffin]

borrow one of the RN Trafalgar's that are coming out of service - just get started

Possibly the worst option. Wrong end of the bathtub curve, lots of supportability issues. Taking revenge for the Ashes a bit far......

[ORAC]

The final boat, HMS Triumph was due to be retired this year, that has been extended 18 months to 2024.

Several of the boats have, as they’ve aged, experienced thermal fatigue cracks in the reactor coolant systems, some critical. The PW2 reactors also don’t meet modern safety rules.

The chances of any having their life extended enough to be offered even temporarily to the RAN are between nil….. and nil.

The current proposal to base a couple of Astute in Australia and dual man them whilst training reactor officers and COs is about as far as the RN can stretch.

[rattman]

Possibly the worst option. Wrong end of the bathtub curve, lots of supportability issues. Taking revenge for the Ashes a bit far......

Agree thats the worst of all possible options, its worse than one of the the 688's. While it was a video and edited and possibly dramatised for TV the show they made last year on board a trafalgar did not paint the a ship (trenchant) in a good light in any way shape or form

Also note australia has mixed sex crews, neither the a trafalgars or 688 are designed for this. Virginia's are and think astutes are as well

[rattman]

Not really a surprise but as close to official confirmtion

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/australians-now-attending-british-nuclear-submarine-courses/

[tartare]

Hmm - wonder if they'll put Oz Captains through UK Perisher...?
EDIT: I see they do already...

[rattman]

Hmm - wonder if they'll put Oz Captains through UK Perisher...?
EDIT: I see they do already...

As you said we already do, we have been sending them to UK perisher since the days of the O-Boats. Last few years we have also been sending them to the dutch perisher and very recently they have been going through the a USN command course as well. Many of the australian captains, 3 last time I looked, are Ex Royal Navy

[tartare]

It sounds like a hell of a course - as you'd want it to be.
Great anecdote in the Hennessey book about the trainee who had a raw steak served to him in the captains chair by Teacher - because he wasn't being tactically aggressive enough.

[Asturias56]

"The current proposal to base a couple of Astute in Australia "

Out of a current force of four? and three more due to arrive over quite a long time? The RN have always said they needed at least 7 for current ops.

[ORAC]

Anson currently on trials pre-commissioning. Agamemnon is due to to be commissioned about the end of 2024 early 2025 and the last Agincourt, around 2028.

[Not_a_boffin]

"The current proposal to base a couple of Astute in Australia "

Out of a current force of four? and three more due to arrive over quite a long time? The RN have always said they needed at least 7 for current ops.

I don't think there's an actual proposal to base a couple in Perth. That's far more likely to be a case of people adding 2+2 and getting 5.

However - it's not so long ago that visits of nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed warships to Australia were forbidden. ISTR Invincible (or possibly Lusty) having some real issues around that on a round the world tour in the mid to late 80s when she had a propulsion casualty and needed dry-docking. Not sure how many other kettle-powered ships have visited since then, although the policy is long-since defunct.

[rattman]

I don't think there's an actual proposal to base a couple in Perth. That's far more likely to be a case of people adding 2+2 and getting 5.

However - it's not so long ago that visits of nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed warships to Australia were forbidden. ISTR Invincible (or possibly Lusty) having some real issues around that on a round the world tour in the mid to late 80s when she had a propulsion casualty and needed dry-docking. Not sure how many other kettle-powered ships have visited since then, although the policy is long-since defunct.

Nulcear ships have never been banned from australia. You might be thinking of NZ but australia pretty much continuously gets visted by nuclear powered aircraft carriers. Subs are way less common and neither invincible or a illustrious was nuclear powered

[rattman]

Been saying SK conventional subs need to be strongly considered for interem replacement for collins and maybe I was right

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/south-korea-offers-aussies-new-subs-in-7-years-to-close-collins-gap/

[NumptyAussie]

Nulcear ships have never been banned from australia. You might be thinking of NZ but australia pretty much continuously gets visted by nuclear powered aircraft carriers. Subs are way less common and neither invincible or a illustrious was nuclear powered

Nukes are/were banned from Fremantle.

Nuclear powered Carriers had to anchor on the outer anchorage at Gage Roads.

Subs could sneak down the channel to FBW and hide out there.

[golder]

Been saying SK conventional subs need to be strongly considered for interem replacement for collins and maybe I was right

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/south-korea-offers-aussies-new-subs-in-7-years-to-close-collins-gap/
There are going to be more opinion pieces, than flees on a dog. This one is stating the Collins will go to 2030.

This doesn't allow for the LOTE. Starting in 2026 and finishing in 2038. With a 10 year service life. Taking it to the last one being in the water till 2048. There is also talk of some hulls may be suitable for a second update. Currently "The Collins Class are internationally regarded among the best conventional submarines in the world" I don't see that changing after the LOTE

There is also statements about other weapon systems covering any potential gaps. The potential gap may be covered, we will find out in 9 months.

[Asturias56]

Anson currently on trials pre-commissioning. Agamemnon is due to to be commissioned about the end of 2024 early 2025 and the last Agincourt, around 2028.

"Astute" was completed in 2007 - so that's a +21 year programme for 7 boats. Gives you some idea of how hard it is to build up a fleet.